Apple vs the government
The court order asks Apple to provide “reasonable technical assistance” in creating a new mobile operating system. This iOS would disable a feature in the iPhone that automatically erases its data after too many failed attempts for access. This way the FBI can attempt to unlock the phone by submitting an endless series of passcodes via something known as a brute-force attack.
That's far from reasonable. Suck a dick, FBI. And NSA.
National Security Agency Director Adm. Michael Rogers warns that encryption is making it “much more difficult” for the agency to intercept the communications of terrorist groups like the Islamic State, citing November’s Paris attacks as a case where his agency was left in the dark because the perpetrators used new technologies to disguise their communications.
...
“Is it harder for us to generate the kind of knowledge that I would like against some of these targets? Yes,” Rogers said. “Is that directly tied in part to changes they are making in their communications? Yes. Does encryption make it much more difficult for us to execute our mission. Yes.”
Does the general public get to invade the government's privacy? Then fuck off.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Apple gets 3 more days. Since Donnie Dickweed Douchebag has chosen to weigh in on this, let me relay his thoughts:
Fuck off and die, shithead. You're the last person in the universe qualified to talk about "common sense."
Edited By Malcolm on 1455906114
Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump, for one, urged Apple to drop its guard. "Who do they think they are? They have to open it up," he said. "We have to use common sense."
Fuck off and die, shithead. You're the last person in the universe qualified to talk about "common sense."
Edited By Malcolm on 1455906114
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
You're the last person in the universe qualified to talk about "common sense."
I can think of a LOT more unqualified people. That's not in defense of Trump, but let's keep things grounded.
That being said, he's very wrong on this point.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
I think this battle exemplifies precisely why the gov't shouldn't be run by scared, old luddites, most of whom probably still regard DVDs as "those new-fangled VHS tapes."
The law the gov't says gives them the right to bust into this phone: All Writs Act of 178-goddamned-9, last looked at seriously in 1911.
The law Apple says guarantees they don't have to do this: Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act from 1992.
The law the gov't says gives them the right to bust into this phone: All Writs Act of 178-goddamned-9, last looked at seriously in 1911.
The law Apple says guarantees they don't have to do this: Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act from 1992.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Former NSA head backs Apple.
He seems insane for other reasons, though.
"In this specific case, I'm trending toward the government, but I've got to tell you in general I oppose the government's effort, personified by FBI Director Jim Comey," Hayden told Capital Download in an interview about his memoir, Playing to the Edge: American Intelligence in the Age of Terror. "Jim would like a back door available to American law enforcement in all devices globally. And, frankly, I think on balance that actually harms American safety and security, even though it might make Jim's job a bit easier in some specific circumstances."
He seems insane for other reasons, though.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
This is genuinely making me nervous.
Even half is disturbing.
Stupid fucking public.
Depending on how you look at it, that could suggest only a small majority side with the FBI (51 percent versus 49 percent who oppose it or are undecided), or it could suggest a clear majority in the FBI's favor (51 percent to 38 percent).
Even half is disturbing.
Another factor is that while many people favor security in the abstract, they might be less willing to see their own personal data put at risk, Tyson said. According to the latest study, among those who personally own an iPhone, the views were more evenly divided, with 47 percent saying Apple should help unlock the phone, and 43 percent saying it should not.
Stupid fucking public.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
I'll be honest, I haven't followed this issue very closely.
In the abstract, Apple should not unlock all phones or build a backdoor, etc. For this one phone, Apple should do what it can particularly since it wasn't the phone possessor's actual phone, it belonged to his business.
I'm not sure where that puts me in the debate.
In the abstract, Apple should not unlock all phones or build a backdoor, etc. For this one phone, Apple should do what it can particularly since it wasn't the phone possessor's actual phone, it belonged to his business.
I'm not sure where that puts me in the debate.
It's not me, it's someone else.
The problem is by creating the one-off OS changes that will allow this phone to be unlocked and giving that to the FBI they also hand over the unlock code to every other smart phone they produce. You simply can't trust the FBI to use it once and delete it; they'll start using it any time they have a chance.
There's no middle ground there.
Edited By TPRJones on 1456238160
There's no middle ground there.
Edited By TPRJones on 1456238160
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
I find that really hard to believe.TPRJones wrote:The problem is by creating the one-off OS changes that will allow this phone to be unlocked and giving that to the FBI they also hand over the unlock code to every other smart phone they produce. You simply can't trust the FBI to use it once and delete it; they'll start using it any time they have a chance.
There's no middle ground there.
Surely Apple could unlock/break the things themselves, then give the phone + code to the FBI, the end?
It's not me, it's someone else.
Doubt it. Once you open that window, even a crack, you risk a complete security meltdown. And fuck bill. That's exactly how legal precedent works.TheCatt wrote:I find that really hard to believe.TPRJones wrote:The problem is by creating the one-off OS changes that will allow this phone to be unlocked and giving that to the FBI they also hand over the unlock code to every other smart phone they produce. You simply can't trust the FBI to use it once and delete it; they'll start using it any time they have a chance.
There's no middle ground there.
Surely Apple could unlock/break the things themselves, then give the phone + code to the FBI, the end?
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Chain of custody issue.TheCatt wrote:I find that really hard to believe.TPRJones wrote:The problem is by creating the one-off OS changes that will allow this phone to be unlocked and giving that to the FBI they also hand over the unlock code to every other smart phone they produce. You simply can't trust the FBI to use it once and delete it; they'll start using it any time they have a chance.
There's no middle ground there.
Surely Apple could unlock/break the things themselves, then give the phone + code to the FBI, the end?
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
There's workarounds for that, according to a quick google.GORDON wrote:Chain of custody issue.TheCatt wrote:I find that really hard to believe.TPRJones wrote:The problem is by creating the one-off OS changes that will allow this phone to be unlocked and giving that to the FBI they also hand over the unlock code to every other smart phone they produce. You simply can't trust the FBI to use it once and delete it; they'll start using it any time they have a chance.
There's no middle ground there.
Surely Apple could unlock/break the things themselves, then give the phone + code to the FBI, the end?
It's not me, it's someone else.
This is precisely it. The FBI wants to remove the "10 strikes and self-destruct" rule that iPhone data adheres to. An OS update affects more than this single piece of hardware. Even if that update is only placed in the hands of the FBI and never leaks out, I still don't like it because of the potential for abuse. I predict a huge spike in aftermarket smartphone software if the fascist feds get their way.TPRJones wrote:From what I understand the FBI refuses to take that approach. They want Apple to give them the OS patched to allow easy access and let the FBI do the actual breaking.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
K... so there is a 3rd way. At any rate, I support that approach. I don't support the patched-OS version.TPRJones wrote:From what I understand the FBI refuses to take that approach. They want Apple to give them the OS patched to allow easy access and let the FBI do the actual breaking.
It's not me, it's someone else.
If there's a solution that only compromises that phone, and that tech is not allowed to be seen or remain in the hands of the feds, then I'll give it my backing. In the absence of such an option, all I see are bullshit arguments to screw the privacy of potentially millions of people based on emotion and ignorance.
There's not a great way to "open up" that one phone without fucking over everyone else who owns one, according to the wording of the FBI request.
Yet again, the way the FBI has framed their request has deeper consequences than this one incident.
Apple is thinking of safety -- the safety of everyone else with an iPhone.
We hit on this already, but what a dumb fucking analogy.
"The only way to find out is to open up that phone and get in there," he said. "A lot of the families of the victims, we're kind of angry and confused as to why Apple is refusing to do this."
There's not a great way to "open up" that one phone without fucking over everyone else who owns one, according to the wording of the FBI request.
Farook had worked as a county health inspector. Larson said the government has a strong case because of Farook's diminished privacy interests as a "dead, murderous terrorist" and because the phone was owned by his employer, the county government. "You're weighing that against the interest of enforcement in an investigation and the victims and their interest in obtaining this knowledge," he said.
Yet again, the way the FBI has framed their request has deeper consequences than this one incident.
"We have a constitution and we have civil liberties in this country. Terrorists want to take that away from us," he said in an appearance on "CBS This Morning." Gregory Clayborn, whose 27-year-old daughter, Sierra, died in the attack, said he hasn't been asked to join the case but believes Apple is obligated to unlock the phone.
"This makes me a little bit angry with Apple," Clayborn said. "It makes me question their interest in the safety of this country."
Apple is thinking of safety -- the safety of everyone else with an iPhone.
the newspaper quotes Gates as saying.
"It is no different than [the question of] should anybody ever have been able to tell the phone company to get information, should anybody be able to get at bank records," Gates continued. "Let's say the bank had tied a ribbon round the disk drive and said 'don't make me cut this ribbon because you'll make me cut it many times."'
We hit on this already, but what a dumb fucking analogy.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."